[blfs-dev] Xfconf-4.10.0 and Glib-1.280
Glib-1.262 is only required to build Xfconf's Perl bindings; it is not required to build Xfconf. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Perl Modules
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 07:43:41PM -0600, Randy McMurchy wrote: Ken Moffat wrote these words on 12/11/12 19:28 CST: Sounds nice, but what about when a newer version of a module suddenly brings in a whole load of extra dependencies ? That would be the case in any update. Problem is that CPAN typically deletes old versions, and that requires users to find and install updated versions. I didn't know that. I have extensive experience with Perl Modules and have found that they are very backwards compatible. What worked in the past typically works going forward. OK, I'm happy to take your word for that. In the case of LWP (which you mentioned), I have made significant updates to that portion of the Perl Module page, and I am confident that the new instructions I will commit will work for some time. Great, I have no problems with you making this change. rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.23] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 19:32:00 up 6 days, 5:31, 1 user, load average: 0.20, 0.06, 0.02 I hope those aren't the versions you are using to _test_ any general changes you are making ;-) ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Perl Modules
Ken Moffat wrote these words on 12/12/12 17:33 CST: On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 07:43:41PM -0600, Randy McMurchy wrote: rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.23] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 19:32:00 up 6 days, 5:31, 1 user, load average: 0.20, 0.06, 0.02 I hope those aren't the versions you are using to _test_ any general changes you are making ;-) Gosh, if I were to use that box for testing, I'd have to give up. It is very slow. I only use it for email. In fact, I don't even need it as I have many machines available, but it has sentimental value. I've had it forever and it won't die. It is too slow to update to a current release of LFS, though I suppose I could fire up JHalfs and wait a few days! But then I would have to install X and Thunderbird. I shudder at the thought of doing that on this machine. It works fine as my LFS email client. :-) -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.23] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 18:15:00 up 7 days, 4:14, 1 user, load average: 0.12, 0.06, 0.02 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
